week four

Edit 0 2 …

Journal Activities


Bentham (306-312)

Before Reading
  • (1) What does happiness mean? Relate your definition to pleasure or the Epicureans.

After Reading
  • (2) What is the “principle of utility”? What does Bentham mean by ‘utility’?
  • (3) How does the principle of utility apply to ethics? To ‘right and wrong’?
  • (4) Examine XI and XII. How does Bentham respond to the idea that humans don’t live according to the principle of utility?
  • (5) Examine Bentham 1-10 (309). Do any of these remind you of Kant? Be specific.
  • (6) Explain the circumstances for pleasure on page 316. Why are these important?
  • (7) Why do you think Bentham writes that the process shouldn’t be followed in every case? (312)

Sidgwick (313-317)

After Reading
  • (1) Sidgwick writes about the problem involving future generations and possibly overpopulation. How should utilitarianism calculate happiness, according to Sidgwick? If the greater number of people means a greater amount of happiness, isn’t this a problem?
  • (2) At what points does Sidgwick sound like Kant?
  • (3) ‘Common Sense’ means the general moral consensus. Why might utilitarianism come into conflict with common morality?
  • (4) How does Sidgwick solve issues regarding the individual’s utilitarian happiness and the community’s utilitarian happiness?
  • (5) What do you think: are future generations important to consider in utilitarianism?

Smart (317-319)

After Reading
  • (1) Why is it easier to be a utilitarian in the “desert island promise” case than a Kantian (or a deontologist)?
  • (2) Do you agree or disagree with Smart’s scenario?

Dostoevsky (332)

After Reading
  • (1) Is this an easy scenario for a utilitarian to solve? How would you resolve this situation?

Williams (339-345)

After Reading
  • (1) Summarize the two cases that are problematic for utilitarianism. Why are they problematic?
  • (2) What role does integrity and responsibility play within utilitarianism?
  • (3) How does Williams object using ‘happiness’ and personal projects?

Reflection: Week 4
Utilitarianism


Instructions

You will write a one to two page (minimum) reflection incorporating some of the texts that we’ve read.

I am looking to see you engage with at least three of the following authors:

Bentham
Sidgwick
Smart
Singer
Dostoevsky
Williams

“Please remember to cite correctly” when writing your paper (Jung 2).

Possible Topics

  • Ø Write about a time that you had to make a difficult decision that involved doing harm. Did you use some form of utilitarianism to make the decision?

  • Ø How is utilitarianism a good ethical theory? What problems do you have with it?

  • Ø How is utilitarianism a bad ethical theory? What good do you see in it?

  • Ø Talk to me about a topic that you would like to write about.

Grading Criteria

Title: 5 pts
Citing: 5 pts.
Use and understanding of 3 authors: 50 pts.
Writing Style: 20 pts
Total: 80 pts

Criteria
 20 pts
 16 pts
 12 pts
 8 pts
Paper Quality and Style of Writing
 The paper is of a dynamic, creative, and professional quality. There aren’t any clichés that are used, and the paper is focused on critically examining philosophical ideas.
 The paper is of a professional quality. There may be some clichés that are used, but overall, the paper is focused on critically examining philosophical ideas.
 The paper is of a professional quality. There may be some clichés that are used. The paper could be improved in terms of critically examining philosophical ideas.
 The paper lacks a professional quality. The paper lacked critically examining philosophical ideas.


Criteria
 50 pts
 40 pts
 30 pts
 20 pts
Philosophical Ideas
 The philosophical ideas were portrayed with accuracy. Several quotes were chosen and explained clearly, offering an ideal reading of the philosophers.
 The philosophical ideas were portrayed in a mostly accurate way. Several quotes were chosen and explained clearly, offering a good but flawed reading of the philosophers.
 The philosophical ideas were portrayed in a somewhat accurate way. There may have been few quotes chosen, but the quotes were explained clearly, offering a decent but flawed reading of the philosophers.
 The philosophical ideas were not portrayed in an accurate way, or there was only one quote chosen.